The Eve Rocks Challenge (v0.90 only)

[Laie]

I've played around with a Lander Can version. I might see what I can do about putting a mission together this weekend.

Be aware that I will care about the diameter of the lifter, though.

- - - Updated - - -

The craft was the Eve 4 Man Lander IV (and in all fairness is like the 3rd generation of Eve 4 man lander... Sea Level Eve is hard...)

On the Kerbin Launch pad this thing is 5,163 ton, 2.32 million funds, 803 part beast.

Once I land on Eve it's only 341 parts and about 668 tons.

That's quite small for a four-man lander. Impressive!

Congratulations, you have completed the Eve Rocks Challenge on Jebediah's Level!

(and sorry for the long wait -- I completely missed your post)

- - - Updated - - -

Yes that's mk1. Apart from the ladder, I've tested nothing. So wish Jeb luck!

Untested? He'll need it.

You seem to have enough TWR and burn time to make it, but I'm curios how that SRB thing plays out. Is there a gimballing engine inside or do you have enough reaction wheels? You won't start from a straight and level place, you know...

BTW, solid fuel offers the least oomph for it's weight, by far. That's not a problem if you light it up on the launchpad, but by the time the SRB has arrived on Eve it has become even more expensive than the equivalent amount of liquid fuel and a proper engine.

Edited February 19, 2015 by Laie

[KnutG]

Here a summary of my EveMission (realised 9 month ago with KSP V.023.5)

First i have searched my landing site with a RoverTanker-probe (Eve Easter Egg from Kerbtown Mod)

than - i startet in to kerbin Orbit:

there - i refill the Boosters:

after get to an higher orbit and refuell again we can start the voyage 2 Eve

after Eve Aerobraking...

i refilled the Boosters again...

and the landing can begin... (later i begin the exploration of the Eve-cave (Kerbtown Mod) with the also landet EveFlyer)

After the cave-exploration...

...and an excursion with the EveFlyer the Kerbonauts comes back to the landing ship...

this will be continued...

- - - Updated - - -

Now, they start back to Orbit...

(video as link because i dónt can include more than 5 videos now)

It´s done!!!

Now the landing legs will be attached and we fly home to Kerbin

here comes the science summary:

And the stats (without EveFlyer and Refuel-ExplorerRover)

[table]

[tr]

[th]Ship[/th]

[th]Part Count[/th]

[th]Launch Weight[/th]

[th]Cost[/th]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]EveExplorer I[/td]

[td]571[/td]

[td]2406.6[/td]

[td]1,212,542[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Eve Tanker 1 (2)[/td]

[td]335[/td]

[td]2,848.8[/td]

[td]1,287,424[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Eve Tanker 3[/td]

[td]342[/td]

[td]2,785.6[/td]

[td]1,272,722[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Eve Home (with landing legs)[/td]

[td]133[/td]

[td]675.6[/td]

[td]340,840[/td]

[/tr]

[tr]

[td]Totals[/td]

[td]1716[/td]

[td]11564.4[/td]

[td]5,400,952[/td]

[/tr]

[/table]

The costs i have looked today with my old craft-files (in 0.23.5 all this has cost nothing )

And i checked wheter the Ship fits in the VAB circle:

[McFarnsworth]

Untested? He'll need it.

You seem to have enough TWR and burn time to make it, but I'm curios how that SRB thing plays out. Is there a gimballing engine inside or do you have enough reaction wheels? You won't start from a straight and level place, you know...

BTW, solid fuel offers the least oomph for it's weight, by far. That's not a problem if you light it up on the launchpad, but by the time the SRB has arrived on Eve it has become even more expensive than the equivalent amount of liquid fuel and a proper engine.

According to the numbers my TWR on Eve might be a bit low (around 1.6 - 1.7 for pretty much every stage) so I don't think a sealevel ascent is possible. A little under 12k dV might not cut it either.

I know the SRB's are heavy, but getting mass to Eve doesn't seem like the hard part, so might as well try to do something different. They're the first ascent stage, and there's a large reaction wheel embedded underneath there somewhere. In fact, the entire rocket works on that single reaction wheel and the torque from the pod. It handles like an oil tanker, not a bus.

I was struggling while building the Kerbin launcher, then I noticed Mechjeb was giving me the TWR values for Eve.

The whole thing is currently in Kerbin orbit awaiting a transfer window with 1500 dV left in the launch vehicle. Another 2000 dV in the transfer stage. And 3000 dV in each of the return craft. ... I may have massively overbuilt everything except the Eve lifter (the important bit)

[Dewirix]

According to the numbers my TWR on Eve might be a bit low (around 1.6 - 1.7 for pretty much every stage) so I don't think a sealevel ascent is possible. A little under 12k dV might not cut it either.

My ascender only had about 1.4 TWR per stage and that was able to make it to orbit from 3-4,000m with 11.1k dV. Bear in mind that because Eve's atmosphere is so thick terminal velocity in the lower reaches is really low (167ms^-1 at 15,000m, compared to 438 on Kerbin) so there's a good possibility that you simply can't use a lot of that extra TWR.

Eve's surface gravity is 16.7ms^-1, so a surface TWR of 1.6 implies the rocket is capable of accelerating at 16.7 * 1.6 = 26.72ms^-2. Subtracting Eve's gravity from this gives a net acceleration of 26.72 - 16.7 = 10.02ms^-2, which is to say that you'd reach sea-level terminal velocity in about six seconds. From my back of the envelope (OK, Excel) calculations, you'll have enough acceleration to maintain terminal velocity up until at least 30,000m, which should be plenty.

What I'm trying to say is I think you'll be fine, but I can well understand the anxiety on the first flight.

[Kelderek]

Your TWR is fine. My Eve ascent vehicle ranged from 1.4 to 1.6 TWR, but mostly hung right at 1.5 and that was from near sea level at 200m altitude.

[Laie]

Once you're out of the thickest atmosphere, delta-V will be a reasonable measure for performance; but depending on choice of engines and TWR, the dV to get to 20km can vary by a lot.

At TWR=1.6, you will need about four minutes to reach 20km. Stages 9 through 4 seem to deliver enough TWR for enough time to get you there. (Stage 4 has a very low TWR to start with, though)

From 20km, you'll still need another 5.5km of delta-V to make orbit. You have that too. So your design could work from sea level, and should work from 1km (saving you about 20 seconds of ascent). I'm wondering about control, though. All the power in the world will do you no good if you can't point it in the right direction.

Subtracting Eve's gravity from this gives a net acceleration of 26.72 - 16.7 = 10.02ms^-2, which is to say that you'd reach sea-level terminal velocity in about six seconds.

Nope. At a TWR<2, the equilibrium between thrust and drag will settle on less than terminal velocity. In the current simple atmo model, SQRT(TWR-1) seems to approximate it quite well.

[McFarnsworth]

Once you're out of the thickest atmosphere, delta-V will be a reasonable measure for performance; but depending on choice of engines and TWR, the dV to get to 20km can vary by a lot.

At TWR=1.6, you will need about four minutes to reach 20km. Stages 9 through 4 seem to deliver enough TWR for enough time to get you there. (Stage 4 has a very low TWR to start with, though)

From 20km, you'll still need another 5.5km of delta-V to make orbit. You have that too. So your design could work from sea level, and should work from 1km (saving you about 20 seconds of ascent). I'm wondering about control, though. All the power in the world will do you no good if you can't point it in the right direction.

The Mechjeb calculation around stage 3 and 4 is a bit off due to a weird staging sequence at that point. It's calculating part of a previous stage (1 FL-T400 + LV-T30) as still attached dead weight, while at that point it should either still be burning its last drops of fuel or be dropped already. Stage 4 TWR is pretty much the same as the other stages, so I also have slightly more dV than MJ tells me.

I haven't had time to fly the mission yet, but I have tested the thing on Kerbin now and everything seems to work as intended, so it's still mk1. The large decouplers are a bit more violent than expected for such a small craft but nothing broke, and I may not have enough chutes. And because the bottom stage is SRB only I have nothing to soften the blow.

Do you fall faster (higher gravity) or slower (thicker atmosphere!) on Eve than you do on Kerbin?

[Kelderek]

Do you fall faster (higher gravity) or slower (thicker atmosphere!) on Eve than you do on Kerbin?

That will depend a lot on the altitude of your landing spot. Sea level on Eve will probably be more chute drag than sea level on Kerbin. Best bet is to test it out on Eve directly using the Hyperedit mod. You can use that to warp your lander directly to Eve orbit so you can practice your landings and ascents in the real environment instead of relying on Kerbin as a substitute. That mod makes this challenge a lot easier to manage and saves a lot of time for testing. Of course, you can't use hyperedit when you do the mission for real, that would be cheating, but there's no reason you can't use it for testing.

[Laie]

Do you fall faster (higher gravity) or slower (thicker atmosphere!) on Eve than you do on Kerbin?

Unless you try to land on the highest peaks, you'll fall slower. No faster than 60-65m/s at sea level. You may want to look at other people's ascents, especially those where a lot of data displays (KER, MJ) are open on the screen. Look for terminal velocity at different altitudes.

As to Hyperedit, it's an invaluable tool if you need to refine your lander again and again. For many people, it won't work until the sixth or seventh try -- it would be quite tedious to start every attempt with a Kerbin launch & transfer. However, the thrill of sending an untested craft to Eve can't be beat, so I personally recommend you stay away from hyperedit for your first try.

[Jodo42]

Welp, here's a Jeb's Level.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

596 parts; 2,468.7 tons (2,452.27 tonnes) at Kerbin liftoff.

329 parts; 131.2 tons (119.02 tonnes) at Eve liftoff.

Roughly 1.5 million funds total cost.

.90

Kerbal Engineer Redux and Precise Node.

I reloaded from a given retroburn that overshot the shoreline by quite a bit and burned more and more retro from there. Overall, took 7 tries to get my landing site that close.

Other than that, building a transfer stage that had the needed amount of delta-v to get the lander there, and then only the return capsule back, was challenging. As you can see I had to use a bit of the return can's fuel to get back to Kerbin. I just wasn't sure how much fuel I'd need, as KER assumed that I was hauling the 130 ton lander everywhere when it did its dV calculation, which I obviously ditched for the return.

Just building the Eve lander was a stretch of my engineering capabilities. Landing it was tricky, as the retroburn could only use so much fuel or the lander wouldn't be able to remake orbit.

I despise nukes, especially for high-mass missions. Even with bunches of them burns just take too long. You can do anything in the game without nukes, and I didn't want to try to transfer a 140t lander anywhere with those pitiful engines.

If I were to redo the challenge, I might include some droptanks on the lander that could be used solely for landing and decoupled once splashed down. I think it's actually a bit easier to land in Eve's oceans than it is on its land, if you're aiming for low altitudes like in this challenge. Ladders can be shorter, you need fewer parts, and the oceans are all perfectly flat: sloped terrain + Eve's high gravity = a bad day for almost any lander. The part count made everything a slideshow for quite some time, so I'd be tempted to try for a lower level next time.

I'd also be interested in doing it once 1.0 comes out. Maybe with TAC Life Support installed. I've always thought no re-entry heating and no life support was rather silly. New atmospheric models should make this into a whole new challenge. What are you going to do about resources?

Thanks for the challenge! I'm happy to have completed one of the forum's 3 "Epic" challenges (the others being Jool 5 and Solar Flare).

Edited February 22, 2015 by Jodo42

[manni01]

Ok, I haven't checked this challenge a long time... Sorry for the rule thingy, I thought that meant that there can't be something with a chair that has a command pod that gets decoupled. I've also removed the badge, but I'm not redoing this challenge...

Edited February 22, 2015 by manni01

[Laie]

Welp, here's a Jeb's Level.

I despise nukes, especially for high-mass missions. Even with bunches of them burns just take too long. You can do anything in the game without nukes, and I didn't want to try to transfer a 140t lander anywhere with those pitiful engines.

If I were to redo the challenge, I might include some droptanks on the lander that could be used solely for landing and decoupled once splashed down.

Thanks for the challenge! I'm happy to have completed one of the forum's 3 "Epic" challenges (the others being Jool 5 and Solar Flare).

Thanks, you're welcome. That was a nice entry, and a pleasure to review. It's truly amazing what the 48-7S can do if one is only willing to use them in numbers -- I didn't run the numbers, but it looks a fair bit smaller than the aerospike-landers I've seen. Congratulations, you've completed the Eve Rocks Challenge on Jebediah's Level!

But of course, all those tiny engines drive up the part count. Talking about which, that outer ring of engines are LV-T45s, are they? Using LVT30+reaction wheels would weigh less at more thrust; you could also save the decouplers etc. that you used to get rid of your reaction wheels. You might even have gone with Rockomax parts: those 16 tanks+engines amount to 2x (orange tank + mainsail); making that swim might prove tricky, though.

Landing in water is easier; but one has to be careful that the lander doesn't tip over, and it's also more demanding in terms of precision landing. I'd rather walk a mile than swim 200 meters.

I agree that Eve is on the edge of where Nukes positively rule. If you have aerospikes for lander engines, using them for the transfer doesn't increase the mass very much over a nuke+less fuel solution, provides a decent TWR, and helps a lot with the part count. I'm not sure if that still works out with 48-7S, though. The transfer fuel tanks can also serve as floats, and as mountpoints for all the stuff you no longer need on the way up.

[McFarnsworth]

The mission is progressing slowly but surely.

Currently in a parking orbit above Eve, still on the Kerbin ascent stage with exactly 500 dV left

Couple of things I've noticed:

- One reaction wheel is NOT enough for the entire ship. It takes about 1:30 to turn the ship around. No RCS or Vernor engines either.

- I have no easy way to deorbit the lander. I can do it using the mothership, but hitting a decent landing location will be a complete crapshoot.

So no showstoppers so far, but the hard part is obviously only just coming up.

Edit: It can survive the landing. There is now a hole in the air where I punched it.

Edited February 24, 2015 by McFarnsworth

[luizopiloto]

I have a base on EVE... with regular crew change and more... It counts as something?

[gm537]

That's quite small for a four-man lander. Impressive!

Congratulations, you have completed the Eve Rocks Challenge on Jebediah's Level!

(and sorry for the long wait -- I completely missed your post)

Thanks Laie! Does my name get put on the front page of awesome-ness? Haha So far I think Astrobond for his super inexpensive entry (when counting reusable launcher) is probably my favorite. That's some serious engineering.

[Deutherius]

I have a base on EVE... with regular crew change and more... It counts as something?

It's cool as heck, but I'm afraid it violates the "No seat-only lifters" rule.

[Commander Zoom]

Here is my submission for completing the Eve Rocks challenge on Level 1.

I sent three ships, two of which were assembled in orbit (and then disassembled, reassembled, etc), with a total cost of 1,735,976 funds. The lander alone, plus the booster to put it in LKO, was 415 parts and 255,860 funds. On the surface of Eve, it's 184 parts (in 12 stages), masses 44.81 tons, and costs 74,604 funds. (Note that in the actual screenshots, it's a couple of tons lighter from fuel expended during touchdown.)

After nursing my current save through several game updates, I've frozen my version at .24.2, as I have a number of vessels in flight; that's why I'm still using old versions of various mods. My plan is to wrap things up and then start over fresh with the release of 1.0. Those mods include:

Active Texture Managment, Crew Manifest, Custom Biomes (which gives me .90 biomes in .24), Docking Port Alignment Indicator, Environmental Visual Enhancements, Hot Rockets (only for the nuke FX), HyperEdit (for testing), Kerbal Alarm Clock, Kerbal Attachment System (KAS), MechJeb, Procedural Fairings, RCS Build Aid, SCANsat, SelectRoot, Texture Replacer

and a few parts from Goblin Enterprises, HullCam VDS, TurboNisu, and Umbra Space Industries (RoverDude). I've scrubbed all of these from the "clean" version of the lander, which I have uploaded at the following link:

Eve Lander Clean

I've verified that it loads in a clean copy of .24, and should even convert to later versions without much trouble - I didn't use any of the old reaction wheels, etc. (Took ages to clean out all the KASModuleGrab entries, which I guess I should consider my penance for abusing those massless Struct Cubes.) There are just a few action groups: 2 toggles the ladders, 9 for All The Science, and 0 runs the antenna in and out. Everything else is handled through staging.

I think I found my landing site by starting with kerbalmaps and looking for highlands along the equator. There's quite a lot to choose from, actually, including the strip between the crater sea and its western neighbor; and when you zoom in, there's one good-sized bump at about the 15° W mark with elevations in the 5000+ meter range. From there, using the excuse that I'd already sent one probe to do basic radar-mapping of the planet (and would be sending another along for better scans, before the actual landing), I used HyperEdit and the debug menu to drop a basic lander - or maybe a rover - on that region and look around for the best spot. I finally settled on the vicinity of 0° 1' 40" N, 15° 39' 40" W (5630 meters ASL), and testing began in earnest.

I didn't want to build/send a behemoth of a lander, like some of the designs I've seen on this thread and elsewhere, so I decided to try to keep it small and light; that's part of the reason I went for a high-elevation site. My initial design was heavily influenced by astrobond's AR 9 (without the glider, of course), but I went with six-fold symmetry rather than four, and from there things proceeded in their own direction. MAV3RICK and Norcalplanner were also inspirations. At one point I considered a rover, carried and dropped by another craft, but that didn't make it into the final mission. So the only samples would be coming from wherever I put down.

The lander design went through at least six major revisions and a lot of little tweaks. After aerospikes failed me, or vice versa, I decided to go with lots and lots of 48-7S(es); if SQUAD says they're okay for stock, I'm not going to argue. The small drop tanks stuck to the top came in when I decided I needed just a little more delta-v in the later stages and couldn't think of anywhere else to put it. I clearly recall my reaction to the first try that actually got to orbit: "holy ****, he's going to make it." (Maclorf, my main test pilot in the "sim" save, earned himself a spot on the next Duna mission in the "real" one on the basis of all those attempts.) After that, I just made a few more tweaks and refinements, like the engine shields, before sticking it on top of one of Temstar's Zenith boosters and calling it done.

Please note that I could have just as easily brought one or both kerbals home along with the samples, but chose to leave them on station (literally) in Eve orbit. Also, to avoid disruption to other on-going missions, I made a copy of the entire save, deleted those other missions, and then fast-forwarded to the Eve return window. Still, everything shown here really happened... or will.

And now, what you've all been waiting for - the pics.

Chapter 1 - Some Assembly Required

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Chapter 2 - "Give Us a Kiss, Luv"

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Chapter 3 - There and Back Again

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Chapter 4 - Bouncy Castle

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Chapter 5 - Message in a Bottle

Javascript is disabled. View full album

I've tried to cover everything, but if you have any questions, feel free to ask.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Commander Zoom

[Commander Zoom]

Bump.

It's been a week - Laie, are you there? Can I get an official "yes, it counts" from someone?

[HoloYolo]

Question! Can you make a special category for RSS? Can we do this on "Venus"?

[gm537]

That's quite small for a four-man lander. Impressive!

Congratulations, you have completed the Eve Rocks Challenge on Jebediah's Level!

(and sorry for the long wait -- I completely missed your post)

No worries Laie! Do I get my name on the list of awesome now too?

[TaintedLion]

I'm going to do this challenge. Am I allowed a lab for the "For Science!" ? And can I use mods that add more science parts? Like DMagic Orbital?

[sephirotic]

Old video but here is my submission:

This is officially the first 100% stock (only mod used was engineer to show stats on the mission no MJ and manual flight) full ascent vehicle after the nerf of aerospike and Eve's top mountain ever to be released on the forums or youtube. The vehicle on the video can launch at 1200meters altitude, I have a further optimized version of the ascent vehicle that since version 0.23.5 can launch from 500 meters and possibly lower.

[norup]

I made my first manned mission and return back in October 2013, but only using a command chair. Now this seems a good time to try again before the 1.0 release, as it seems many things will change dramatically. In the rocket design here, I took a perverse pleasure in ignoring aerodynamic efficiency.

This is an entry for Level 3, Going all the way:

Game version 0.90

Mods used:

Kerbal Engineer

Docking Port Alignment Indicator

Hyperedit (Only for testing before mission)

Launch from Kerbin:

The Eve lander was launched first:

At launch: 374 parts, 1424 tonnes 765K$

Lander alone:

263 parts, 246,5 tonnes, 171K$

Next, the ferry for pushing the lander into Eve orbit and going back was launched, then docked in LKO:

At launch:

149 parts, 982 tonnes, 469K$

Ferry alone:

80 parts, 150 tonnes, 96K$

Docking the large vessels in LKO was a pain, with low framerate and underpowered and poorly placed thrusters, that induced more wobble than motion. I managed to dock a couple of times with the last chemical stage attached, only to find that there was a design error in the nuclear ferry. On one of these occasions, the orbit of the Eve lander stage was raised from 105x109km to 106x308km using the chemical LKO rocket of the ferry lifter, so strictly speaking, I have used three launches for the mission.

With the final design of the ferry, I had to abandon the chemical stage to be able to dock, wasting a similar amount of dV as was gained with the raise mentioned above.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Going to Eve meant waiting patiently in solar orbit for the planets to align - Eve encounter was after 1y, 366 days. Jeb made an EVA transfer from the Mk1 lander can to the ferry Hitchhiker container for better comfort and more snacks during the long journey. Then LEO was achieved in part by aerobraking, and when Jeb undocked the nuclear ferry from the descent module, the remaining fuel was far greater than expected, so it was saved for the return trip.

The retro+landing cushion rockets were fired to de-orbit, and ...well, after three re-loads the de-orbit burn was tuned to descend to a spot conveniently near the coast and at a height of 373 metres. The descent was slowed by parachutes, timed to open at different heights and the touchdown softened by landing rockets and the landing stage absorbing a little damage.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Jeb the went down the ladder to grab the first soil sample and a nice 2.5km walk to the coast for an ocean sample. Upon trying returning the samples to the lander can, only one could be fitted, to great confusion! The landing had actually happened in the ocean biosphere, and Jeb had to walk further 1.7km inland to get to a land biome and grab a sample.

Ascent to LEO and rendezvous with the return ferry went smoothly, with adjusting thrust to around T/W of 1.9 and orbit turn at 30km. 934m/s dV remained when Jeb EVAed to the ferry, although I staged too late a couple of times. I forgot to make screenshots several times, so most shown here are from a repeat of the return ascent.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

The trip home was pretty uneventful. When in LKO, there was still 3.4Km/s dV to spare. The nuclear ferry was parked in orbit, and descent burn made with the chemical rocket that originally was intended to be the Eve return vehicle. The hitchhiker canister descended with a view to KSC and landed Jeb and the samples safely.

Javascript is disabled. View full album

Edited March 21, 2015 by norup

[Lou]

My entry... FOR SCIENCE!!!

Overview: A single big launch sends two brave Kerbals to Eve. Once there, they use the three science rovers to strip-mine three biomes for their science and return the results to Kerbin -- in duplicate! The first entry made For Science!

Landing Site:

Altitude: 6010m

Latitude: 10 deg, 46', 15" N

Longitude: 17 deg, 46', 17" W

Biome: Eve's Peaks

Site 2: Roughly 15.1 km west of Landing Site

Altitude: 2759m

Latitude: 11 deg, 18', 14" N

Longitude: 378 deg (or maybe 18 deg?), 52', 8" W

Biome: Eve's Midlands

Site 3: Roughly 13.3 km west of Landing Site

Altitude: 2892m

Latitude: 11 deg, 15', 9" N

Longitude: 378 deg (or maybe 18 deg?), 43', 25" W

Biome: Eve's Impact Ejecta

Weight on the launchpad: 9574 T

Part count on the launchpad: 1101

Weight awaiting liftoff on Eve: 559T

Part count awaiting liftoff on Eve: 415

Approximate price tag of the mission: 4,476,451

Game version: 0.9

Mods used: No mods

How I found my landing site: First I scouted potential landing sites using www.kerbalmaps.com, and decided I wanted to aim for the isthmus that has the large crater sea to the east because

1) It had high altitude terrain

2) I assumed the variation in terrain would provide multiple biomes close to one landing site

3) It was a feature I could clearly identify during navigation

My first landing attempt placed me on too much of a slope, but the second attempt gave me a perfect spot!

Notes: Driving downhill from my landing site to the other two biomes (Site 2 and Site 3) required a lot of saveloading because the rovers tended to get up to high speeds (> 40 m/sec) going downhill, which frequently resulted in crashes. I did survive a drive with a top speed of 94 mph (42.1 m/sec)! In retrospect, adding some small wings and control surfaces might have made the rovers into nice rover/gliders. I'm proud of the Eve launcher, which uses repeated modules. The Eve launcher module consists of a Rockomax X200-32 Fuel Tank coupled to three Toroidal Aerospike engines via a TVR-400L Stack Quad-Adapter; the fourth port on the Quad-Adapter attaches to a Structural Fuselage with two LT-2 Landing Struts via a TR-18A Stack Decoupler. Overall the rovers worked great, the Eve launcher worked great, and I'm very happy with how things went. This was a great challenge, right up there with the Jool Five challenge!

Click here for all images

Edited March 25, 2015 by Lou

[Laie]

Sorry people, I'm trying to stay clear of KSP for a while. The time I put into the game, the forum, and everything was becoming seriously unhealthy.